I think rather than having the game stopped for frequent fouls, players would have to adapt to playing a cleaner game to avoid giving away lots of penalties. And if they don't, keep giving the fouls

This happened a couple of years back in the PL when they decided to cut out the shirt pulling. First round of games saw a couple of penalties and suddenly nobody was doing it. Then they started letting it go again and now things are back to where they were. It shows that if you actually apply the rules then magically the players will play to them.

My own speculation is whether a decision has been made on what VAR is and isn't used for, so for example for penalties and red cards I think it isn't going to be used and has been already for just penalties.

Whilst both incidents on Kane were very obvious penalties I suspect the fear is if you start using VAR for any incident in the box with players tussling then you'd never actually get the game played.

But then the counter to that is that because the 3 VAR officials are watching everything in Moscow I don't understand how they aren't telling the referee of something as blatant as last night.

I think rather than having the game stopped for frequent fouls, players would have to adapt to playing a cleaner game to avoid giving away lots of penalties. And if they don't, keep giving the fouls. I don't see how it can be a "fear" that you stop the game too much to penalise cheats? Only a small percentage of the game is actually spent in the penalty areas so I think it will be easy to manage with the right attitude. But as I said before, FIFA seem to think it's more important to pretend their refs don't make human errors than make the game a fairer contest.

Yeah I've heard that exact point made that once players realise that level of physicality will be penalised because of VAR you would expect it to then result in modified behaviour of defenders in the box and therefore result in a fairer contest. I guess people will always argue that that will alter the game too much in terms of players physically contesting balls within the rules of the game, but in reality it shouldn't.

I've always thought it would have been better if for the roll-out of VAR it was made clear that during say, phase 1, it will only be used for set critical decisions. For example:

At least it would then be a bit more transparent as you know when it is and isn't being used. It was clear during our trials during the FA Cup that it was used unnecessarily and that was possibly due to a lack of clarity for referees about when they should and shouldn't be using it.

I thought they were just using it in specific circumstances - penalties being one. The problem is the game is largely refereed by individual opinion rather than following a strict rule. (Unless you're a Japanese goalkeeper) you can't argue with a sensor saying the ball crossed the goalline. But you can differ over whether a player was tripped, slipped or deliberately fell over. You can debate whether a player meant for a ball to hit his arm or not. Even with the help of replays, penalty decisions are still going to rely on an individual making a judgement call that is potentially at odds with what the majority think. And that needs to be resolved somehow, because it's pointless using VAR if it doesn't remove the inconsistency and contoversy created by poor refereeing.

And that is probably the crux of the issue, VAR is a system being brought in that should improve some mistakes and inconsistencies as it offers additional officials and the referee on the pitch a chance to review an incident and make a more informed decision, but in most instances that decision still relies on subjectively applying the rules of the game.

Offsides and whether say the ball cross the touchline prior to a cross that resulted in a goal are probably to one or two areas where subjectivity doesn't apply.

Just read former ref David Elleray's comments on the BBC on how VAR has been used so far, and they sum up what winds me up about referees in general. Gushing praise for the obvious things they've got right. Nonsensical excuses for the things that are wrong. Brazil didn't complain when the goal was scored against them (isn't the point to stop players from complaining because the right decision will be made?). Australia defender got the ball but then the man so right to change the initial decision and give a penalty (except that's a fair tackle surely?). The England penalties not given because of mysterious unseen offences by England players. I'd have far more time for them if they said they just made a mistake on that occasion. The way they try to cover up even the most obvious errors just makes me question their integrity.

Just listened to World Cup Football Daily podcast and apparently the 2 penalty incidents are being reviewed as part of VAR as to why they weren't given. Apparently it's the first instance of the system being reviewed as to why a decision wasn't made at this World Cup.

The farce continues... Australian heads the ball straight at a Danish player's arm at close range, nothing given initially but the ref gives a penalty after watching the replay. And the Danish lad got booked meaning he's suspended from the final group game.

And one that's right... Neymar comically throws himself to the ground, the ref falls for it but then changes his mind after watching the replay. Right decision in the end but I'm not sure why it's not a booking for the dive. And Neymar's now picked up a yellow card moments later for dissent...

It's been very refreshing watching this England side. So far things have gone as I expected them too, us and Belgium have both qualified so there isn't any pressure on the final game. We're playing well and are a young, confident and energetic side so Thursday is a good opportunity to test themselves against one of the top sides at the tournament. The most important thing for me will be to see them go toe to toe with Belgium and not play with fear as we'd expect from England sides of old.

I doubt having those two in the squad would actually have a detrimental effect on what we've seen so far, the improvement is in the system and attitude rather than individual personnel. For once, expectations are realistic. Although the one downside to winning 6-1 is that some are getting carried away.

I think it would have made a difference. The reason this team is a breath of fresh air, I say with completely realistic expectations, is because we have a manager with a clear philosophy and style of play that is much more suited to tournament football and he has assembled a squad to fit that system that also clearly get on well with one another on and off the pitch.

It isn't necessarily Rooney or Hart's fault the type of attention they attract, likewise going further back to the likes of Gerrard, Ferdinand, Beckham et al, but there is a togetherness with this squad that very clearly comes across. Ferdinand himself has already commented in this regard as a pundit.

We're there as a team with a clear style and way or playing, not as a celebrated set of individuals.

It's frustrating to see some of the media beginning to over hype what has happened so far. Irrespective of the scorelines I think our performances have been very similar across both games we just had a better referee and some better finishing against Panama. Personally I expected us to be in this exact position with the first real test coming this Thursday.

I've always thought we'd get to the quarter finals and anything beyond that would be a big bonus. Not only would that represent progress but the manner in which we're already playing, if that translates to better opposition, is what will be most pleasing regardless of where we get too.